Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

The idea of inviting developers to jump ship is too... un-Linuxy. OSS in general is not about getting the most developers, nor is it about sucking projects dry when they make an alliance with the heart of all computing evil. OSS is about choice. If developers are really unhappy with the alliance, they will jump ship themselves.

Ubuntu is sort of close... but by refusing to have anything proprietary it will never "just work" because graphics drivers and such aren't free as in beer yet.

Ubuntu 7.04 will have proprietary drivers installed by default to make way for AIGLX and Compiz or Beryl. And they are free as in beer, but they're not free as in speech.

There's a pretty big controversy a-brewin' at the wiki [ubuntu.com] about the decision, but I think it's justified. Some compromises have to be made in order to survive a proprietary world, and it's still primarily free software. I don't want Ubuntu to be left behind as the last major OS without a compositing window manager after Vista launches. What really concerns me is how this'll go over after the Kororaa controversy.

It looks like that in one year your advice to some novice at slashdot.com will read: ''You should have known that mentioning Ubuntu, Novell, Xandross, Freespire, Linspire or Lindows as model distros in Slashdot is karma suicide!''O, Tempora! O, Mores!

It was a timing and tone issue. And the post to the opensuse dev list was just uncalled for, his widely syndicated blog would've been sufficient. He could have done all the same things, the same Open Ubuntu summit, and explain Canonical/Ubuntu's position on patents as the catalyst without taking this to such a personal level.
Shuttleworth has done a lot of good, and he's an intelligent guy. I don't think he should be burned in effigy for this, but it was a bad call.

Either way, Mark Shuttleworth wasn't being malicious. He wasn't trying to offend anyone. Moral rights are subjective things, and clearly this didn't offend his own morals, so he wasn't abusing anyone's trust.

Because we're all on the same team. Poaching people from other projects simply isn't done not only because their work will benefit you even if they're working elsewhere, but also because it shows a lack of faith and friendship with other projects who depend on those people. What Mark did was very tacky, and anyone who doesn't recognize why probably isn't involved in any substantial way on a large free software project.

Open Source, by its very nature, has no "employee/employer" structure. Anyone can contribute, employees of Novell are merely contributing during office hours, and those who are developers for OpenSuSE but not on Novell's payroll are merely developers of choice.

The Free Software Foundation has a whole bunch about the whole rewards mentality, but it really boils down to this: If a developer for OpenSuSE is obligated, then they cannot do their best work and will likely be far more counterproductive. This is because obligation to a "leader" (whatever the form of business, whether OSS or not) is feudal in nature and feudal systems emphasize pleasing the leader of the moment, rather than doing what needs to get done. The only way to do what needs to get done is to eliminate all feudal and monarchistic elements from the project.

(The Linux kernel is not an exception, because most of the modules that Linus ends up approving or disapproving have existed for some time and have an established track record. They were not developed to be pleasing to him, they were developed because it needed to get done. Those projects Linus turns down from the vanilla kernel often lead perfectly happy lives and are routinely patched in by assorted distros anyway.)

So the head of Ubuntu is trying to "poach" developers whose code SuSE will likely end up using anyway, as opposed to them being at SuSE and Ubuntu using the code if released. Big wah. It really doesn't impact SuSE, since they can still use the code developed. If it's not the code SuSE wanted done but nobody else thinks that SuSE's idea was worth coding for, then perhaps it was no big loss. If the idea was good, then the developers will develop it anyway. The only loser in this is whoever picks a scoring system that makes them lose.

Would I like it if people poached coders from my Open Source projects? Actually, yes. The SOBs rarely contribute anything as it is. I'd far prefer it if those who aren't interested left and those who were interested joined. It would make life much easier and progress much swifter.

Would I have always felt like that? Well, no, but the meds help a lot.:)

It's called headhunting, and it happens all the time. How many times have there been stories right here on Slashdot about how ABC, Corp. just hired so-and-so from XYZ, Inc.?

But how many of those stories have the head hunter walking into a cube farm and saying, "Hey guys, We are having a job fair across the street." The mailing lists are were the work gets done in a project. He went into the "office" (where the work gets done) and made a statement. If it would have been on the Ubuntu server, or linux.org, or slashdot, there would be no debate. Then again, debate may be exactly what he was going for.

The GPL doesn't self-replicate. To be passed on, it requires that a programmer invest time and energy to invent a derivative work of a GPL project.

Derivative works of copyrighted works are not allowed at all without permission of the copyright holder anyways... the fact that the copyright holder says that derivative works can be freely created without royalty as long as they are put under the same license is not denying anybody any rights they would have otherwise had. People who bitch about how viral the GPL is should take a long hard look at this fact.

Besides, since the GPL's strength comes from Copyright, and Copyright can't protect ideas, so there's nothing to stop you from learning something from a GPL'd work and then reimplementing the ideas yourself, free of any constraints of the GPL, as long as you don't actually copy any previously copyrighted content that was covered by the GPL (but that has more to do with copyright than the GPL).

A virus doesn't self-replicate either. It's replicated by a host, perhaps making the host sick in some way, or even killing it, and it doesn't turn the host into the virus itself. Programs that make use of GPL code don't replicate the it, nor the license agreement. They incorporate it. That's no more viral than a heart transplant. Of course the GPL has terms that would be unreasonable for a heart transplant, and it can have them because it's for computer code.A better analogy would be that with GPL code, I

The idea of inviting developers to jump ship is too... un-Linuxy. OSS in general is not about getting the most developers, nor is it about sucking projects dry when they make an alliance with the heart of all computing evil. OSS is about choice.

No, because Minix was the next closest thing to Linux, and I believe what he used as his development platform before he was done enough to actually run the Linux kernel.Posting about Linux on the Minix list is more akin to posting about Kubuntu or Xubuntu on the Ubuntu lists, or about Ubuntu on the Debian lists , or about Mandrake on the Red Hat lists (when the projects were first started, that is). When derivatives start there's always going to be an announcement on the origional list or no one will know a

Please, elaborate on why this is such a bad thing.Because it has nothing to do with the development of OpenSuse. The developers list is like OpenSuse's office. You don't go into GM headquarters and hang flyers asking engineers to work for Toyota, that's just not cool.

If someone made project related to OpenSuse, or maybe a fork and said, "Hey, look what I'm starting, help me out if you want" cool. If someone says "Hey, look at these project that's existed for 3 years and has a thriving community, why don't y

Also you contradict yourself. You say "OSS is about choice". News flash: Jumping ship is about choice. Mark Shuttleworth is reminding the openSUSE devs of one of the choices available to them.

So, let me get this straight. The openSUSE developers are smart enough to work on openSUSE, smart enough to be welcome to other distros, but too stupid to realize they can work on another distro if they want to?

Whatever OSS is about, Shuttleworth comes off as condescending. The openSUSE developers aren't idiots. If they're unhappy with Novell, they don't need to be reminded of their options.

Also, OSS is very much about attracting developers. Projects without developers don't go anywhere. Projects that have developers do, almost without regard to technical merit (cf. PHP)

Newsflash: Ubuntu is currently one of the most popular Linux distros around. They're not exactly hurting for developers. Certainly not enough to necessitate stealing developers from other distros.

With Ubuntu's questionable inclusion of non-GPL, "binary blob" and closed source drivers, maybe Shuttleworth should worry more about his own distro, and let the openSUSE developers worry about theirs.

"So, let me get this straight. The openSUSE developers are smart enough to work on openSUSE, smart enough to be welcome to other distros, but too stupid to realize they can work on another distro if they want to?"

Not stupid, just ignorant of other options. As long as he wasn't an asshole about it, I see it as fair.

It seems to me that many of the complaints here are due to fear. You are afraid people will actually take him up on the offer.

"With Ubuntu's questionable inclusion of non-GPL, "binary blob" and closed source drivers, maybe Shuttleworth should worry more about his own distro, and let the openSUSE developers worry about theirs."

What you don't realize is that this is the only way a linux distribution has a chance at competing with Windows. Shuttleworth is a (smart) businessman and knows this as well.

What you don't realize is that this is the only way a linux distribution has a chance at competing with Windows. Shuttleworth is a (smart) businessman and knows this as well.

No, I realize that completely. Regardless, distributing binary drivers is in a grey area concerning GPL compliance. Which was my point originally. Shuttleworth/Ubuntu doesn't necessarily have the moral high ground when it comes to GPL adherence.

I am a Linux person. Not a developer, but a Linux user for years, and I am fairly technically competent. (I am a video game programmer, and have a BSc if that means anything). I had no idea that Ubuntu was offering new developer sessions in the near future. Which was basically what Mark said. It didn't come off as condescending at all.

I read it as "Hi. If you are unhappy with Novell right now, I would like to extend an offer to join the Ubuntu project, as we are having developer sessions soon, which might be up your alley."

So, let me get this straight. The openSUSE developers are smart enough to work on openSUSE, smart enough to be welcome to other distros, but too stupid to realize they can work on another distro if they want to?

The suse devs might not have realized that there was an upcoming event targeted at new developers to Ubuntu, though.

And I bet said open source devs who are high school students would bristle at a comment that they behave in a fashion similar to their fellow high school students who adopt 'a high school attitude.' Face it, they probably can't STAND that crap, and it's all around them at the moment.

In order to be "Linuxy", you have to develop something, do a half-assed job, and then disappear completely (devfs, arts, xmms) leaving other devs to make sense of the mess you left behind. The Suse devs did nothing wrong, their management did. Suse is actually a pretty nice distro, but will likely disappear now due to Novel's carelessness. It's pretty depressing actually. It's kinda like how Novel made WP disappear.

I've spent a good weekend of my life trying to get the wireless working with Fedora Core 6, along with Ubuntu; you're really going to attract developers with the half assed, half baked crap that seems to being pushed out by the opensource developers? get the damn product working properly, then maybe those "Microsoft developers" will view Linux as a viable platform to develop on, rather than some operating system for those who wish to waste a whole weekend on trying to get the damn parts working properly.As

Just a couple of points (no necessarily directed at you):1) Who ever the coward who marked me down, show your face, or are you yet another Linux fanboy unwilling to accept a little criticism of your beloved OS; I have no love for Windows, Linux or what have you; I use what gets the job done, out of the box, with minimum work required; and if Windows does that, then so be it; stop the religious jihad, and start focusing on the problems.

2) Why isn't that WPA information on the ubuntu website? the ubuntu docum

Much of the GNOME development is heavily funded by Novell. As we now see, Novell is heavily funded by Microsoft. Unfortunately, GNOME is also the default Ubuntu desktop environment. So in a way, Ubuntu is directly using software developed by Microsoft.

For better or for worse, GTK is a very attractive GUI toolkit for commercial developers to code with. Hence, Sun, Redhat, and (recently) Novell all write their apps in GTK and use Gnome for the desktop environment. In fact, until very recently Suse was a holdout to this rule, and was very KDE and Qt centric. I would wager that Gnome has seen much more code from Redhat (and Sun) than it has from Novell. And Gnome is still very much a free desktop environment.

As an aside, I would like to point out that despite great protest from KDE fans, it looks like Gnome is winning the desktop wars. Trolltech aside, Gnome and GTK have the most commercial support behind them, and that support is really translating into a huge amount of momentum for Gnome. I have long been a Gnome user, and I remember just a few years ago when the number of KDE users vastly outweighed the number of Gnome users, and now it seems just the opposite. Given this trend, and they heavy investment that Canonical has made in Gnome, it really doesn't make sense for them to switch desktop environments.

Ugh where are my mod points?Gnome will be winning the desktop wars when Linux starts winning the desktop wars, and there are no signs that we're even making any progress in this area. As much as Linux is growing, the fact that companies are writing more apps in GTK isn't a sign of Gnome's superiority or even progress in this area as it's still mostly servers and specialty machines.

KDE or Gnome it doesn't matter. They maybe the leper with the most fingers, but they still can't wipe their ass. Whether compani

It depends how you define 'success'. I'd say Gnome is a very successful desktop for me - it does what it says on the tin, makes my workstation work and be easy to interact with, and is stable. It's successful at doing what a desktop is supposed to achieve. It enables me to have a desktop workstation at home for which I don't have to pay Microsoft any money to use.I think it succeeds admirably at the task of being a general purpose desktop OS. Until I bought my Dad a Mac, he used to use it on one of my old P

Yes, it's unfortunate that many of the more common distros are shipping Gnome as the default DE now. I think this is due to the perception that Gnome is "simpler" and thus more suitable for the "average" user. Even Kubuntu completely lobotomizes the default KDE install by removing the majority of entries from the K menu, replacing the control center with a dumbed down version, etc.

Despite the number of distros shipping with Gnome as the default DE, polls suggest [linuxquestions.org] that KDE is still the most used DE, for now

So in a way, Ubuntu is directly using software developed by Microsoft.

That's total bullshit and pure FUD. I guess now that they've run out of technical arguments, the KDE zealots are changing their strategy and spreading FUD about licenses.

KDE is the obvious environment to use instead of GNOME.

KDE is a non-starter for commercial desktop environments because of the cost of Qt for commercial users: that's why Sun, IBM, Ubuntu, RedHat, Eclipse, and SuSE are all basing their major products on Gtk+, not Qt.

He was referring to Shut The Fuck Up And Dance, the new Monkey Boy distribution that is better equipped than any other to take over the DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS and ultimately win the war against Microsoft on MS' own terms by embracing and extending the Redmond tactics as their own.

I don't see an issue with this. Mark's note was well written, and simply mentions that there are alternatives. It was not malicious or derogatory. As for trying to poach developers, you don't think the like of Novell and RedHat aren't doing that all the time? At least Mark is doing it out in the open, instead of using agents, ie. recruiters, to do it.

I don't know if that necessarily is true. I'd much rather leave the back alley poaching "behind the scenes" so to speak. It's kind of like prostitution. You know it's happening, but a lot of times, you just don't want to have to look at it.

Well, we're going to have to agree to disagree. One of the primary attributes of Open Source is the fact that everything is above board and on the table. All of it is open for inspection and critique. This is what makes Open Source better. Mark has fulfilled these criteria, and I commend him for it.

As for trying to poach developers, you don't think the like of Novell and RedHat aren't doing that all the time?

To me, it does not matter what someone else did/does. It doesn't make it right if it was wrong to begin with.

But I don't see any problem in letting people who MAY be unhappy with the current situation know what your views on the subject are and that they may find employment with you if they believe that your views more closely match their's.

It was kinda tacky to insinuate that they weren't dedicated to Free software any more, and such. If Mark felt there were individual developers dissatisfied with Novell's recent activities, it would have been smarter to target them personally rather than post on the openSUSE mailing list to promote Ubuntu.

No big deal. I mean really, they're not trying to hire them. They're trying to convince these guys to work for them for free instead of the other guys. The "invitation" is an invitation to go to some classes so people can learn how to get accepted to work for free. I can't believe people do this.

A lot of people get paid for it. Many paid Linux developers start by contributing some of their free time, then they are hired by a commercial Linux company. Both Novell and Ubuntu pay many developers. I'm sure Mark is interested in volunteer programmers, but it's also quite possible that he'd hire programmers away from Novell. Don't you think if Miguel de Icaza decided he wanted out of Novell because of this that either Red Hat or Canonical would hire him in an instant?

In previous posts, I've made it very clear how I firmly disapprove of Novell's selling of their soul.That being said, I see no problem with this. With the likelihood of developers on the project scratching their heads and wondering what they should do, he extended an invitation. It's up to them whether to accept. It isn't surprised that some on both sides would disapprove and feel threatened.

I can see where some would think this is in bad taste, but letting them know they have a place to go if they want one

I don't think that Mark was saying "Hey, come to Ubuntu, we need more developers" or "You should leave Novell now!". It appears to be more of "Hey, if you're leaving, our distribution has got big fast and there is always an opening for someone we know is good at what they do". Well at least it appears that way to me - just a statement made with good intentions that may have been interpreted by others in a different way. Happens all the time...

On one hand this post is blown out of proportion, probably just because it was written by Mark Shuttleworth. Whether he actually intended in his post to lure devs from openSuse to Ubuntu is hard to tell... If he had only posted "Hello", the fact that it's the openSuse list and the poster is the Big Man of Ubuntu would still make people believe he had an evil agenda, or whatnot.

On the other hand, as you will find out if you follow all those links in TFA+TFS, it appears *someone* at Ubuntu decided to ship binary drivers by default (!) in the next version of the OS. Now that is just wrong, for so many reasons. In any case, it doesn't show Ubuntu a pure-FOSS supporting distro. Some claim the decision was made with little or no community input.

And while the Novell/Microsoft deal is little more than corporate FUD, the binary driver issue and the world's most popular desktop disto's handling of the matter, is crucial. We need to pressure the hardware companies to release drivers, and Ubuntu may soon brutally undermine those efforts.

Mark, leave openSuse alone and do something about the binary driver issue. Please.

the binary driver issue and the world's most popular desktop disto's handling of the matter, is crucial. We need to pressure the hardware companies to release drivers, and Ubuntu may soon brutally undermine those efforts.

NVidia, the folks with the currently best closed binary driver, is considering releasing the source after seeing what market there is. Getting others to release a binary driver may open their eyes too by just introducing them to the market. Inclusion is good thing.
Besides, releasing bin

On the other hand, as you will find out if you follow all those links in TFA+TFS, it appears *someone* at Ubuntu decided to ship binary drivers by default (!) in the next version of the OS. Now that is just wrong, for so many reasons. In any case, it doesn't show Ubuntu a pure-FOSS supporting distro. Some claim the decision was made with little or no community input.

Now, I am not a Ubuntu dev, so I may be wrong,but from my short research:

Regardless, the community seems to be in favour [ubuntuforums.org], or at least in favour of giving users the choice at bootup.

And while the Novell/Microsoft deal is little more than corporate FUD, the binary driver issue and the world's most popular desktop disto's handling of the matter, is crucial. We need to pressure the hardware companies to release drivers, and Ubuntu may soon brutally undermine those efforts.

I am amazed that comments on his blog post are being deleted. I posted one around noon remembering him that ubuntu 6.10 uses novell software (gnome 2.16, which includes mono) and that he should be pushing novell to back out of the patent deal with microsoft instead of luring opensuse developers.

Well, I'm not suprised. He's clearly trying to keep a calm reasonable situation at the same time as the OpenSUSE people start madly over reacting and trying to cause trouble. The difference between a private blog and a public forum like slashdot is that he is responsible for the posts that he leaves up there. If he thinks that further debate of the patents will cause further problems then he probably should delete the comment.If you're trying to communicate with him directly, then the right method is ema

I think you're being confused by the moderation system, as I was when I first posted to his blog. When you post, your comment is shown to you as confirmation, but it won't be shown again until it has passed moderation. Look back in a day and it will probably be visible.

As Anonymous said, it's his blog. If you want to make a statement or post a leading question then post it on a public forum like Slashdot, or on your own blog. He has no obligation to post any comments from anyone on his own blog. I don't know if this is the acceptable etiquette for blogs or not, but it makes sense to me. I don't have a blog, but if I did I wouldn't want it to be completely "open" where anyone can post anything they wanted. I'd want to maintain editorial control of the content.

Is there no wait and see how this turns out, or at first sign of a problem are people really bailing? Sure there's commercial interests vs non-commercial which make the initiatives and reactions different, but come on.

Maybe join one of the independent projects that support all distros if you really disagree....?

To be successful, one thing you need is the 'Freedom to make mistakes'.Perhaps Novell made one, perhaps it did not; it depends on your perspective. But should that one action cause such wide-spread criticism, and calls to abandon the distro and the developers who worked behind it? Even while I have no comment on whether the Novell-MS deal was appropriate, I feel such a reaction is very sad. Is Open Source so fragile?? A fully commercial vendor meanwhile can make its mistakes, learn from it, correct it, move

To be successful, one thing you need is the 'Freedom to make mistakes'.

Sure! But that only applies when there is action to correct those mistakes. Novell has yet to address the damage their mistake has done. They tried to put a positive spin on it. It isn't the same thing.

Did Microsoft hold secret talks with Novell prior to any public announcement to any agreement?

If so, I would hope openSUSE developers would be more concerned about this, rather than a clearly *open* offer from Shuttleworth. I used SUSE for several years prior to Novell coming into the SUSE picture, before I switched to Ubuntu Linux.

I said it before and I'll say it again, I think Mr. Shuttleworth is brilliant.

Look, if Microsoft wanted to bring Windows and Linux together, why didn't they do it when they partnered with Corel around six years ago? (if, indeed, it was a partnership, correct me if I'm wrong please) Does anyone remember Corel Linux? It, like Ubuntu, was a Debian based Linux distribution, with an easy to use graphical installer! And this was around six years ago! (There was even a Corel Linux for Dummies book, check Amazon dot com and see for yourself) Anyone who wants to gain an enlightened perspective can google about Corel Linux and Microsoft and inform themselves. Here are a few important articles:

"Government lawyers want to know more about a deal in which Microsoft gave Corel, perhaps best known for its WordPerfect program, $135 million in exchange for 24 million shares of Corel stock last October." "After the investment, Corel announced it would retreat from developing software designed to run on the Linux operating system, which competes with Microsoft's Windows operating system." - quotes source [washingtonpost.com]

Do you want open meetings and discussions? Isn't that what an open source community thrives on? Or do you want secret meetings?

For those of you who would rather crack chair throwing or developer jokes and ignore the issue, read for yourself in an interview with Bill Gates dated 11/17/2006 where he mentions Novell, indemnification, and the word pioneering all in the same reponse to a question:

History repeats itself, and I believe, in my opinion, we're seeing it happen right now. IMO the Corel/Microsoft events in history should not be ignored. In fact, I suggest they be looked at again closely and compared to the present Novell/Microsoft events for educational purposes.:) Google for yourself and see, there are a lot of juicy articles out there on this. And yes, I know about Xandros, my point is about where Corel Linux was headed.

What? That other projects welcome developers? Do you realy think that there were openSUSE developers that said to themselves: "Gee, I would like to leave as an openSUSE developer, but where should I go?" Do you realy think that there are deveopers who think that openSUSE is the only project in history that wold want their skills?

..of SuSE. SuSE looks good, mature, polished, professional, industrial, etc. It is not secret that SuSE always looked darn good. Unlike some other distros. Strongly IMO the GNOME themes that come with SuSE are very polished and not lacking in any department, an evidence of professional work.

Remember when Mr. Shuttleworth was calling for developers to improve the looks of Ubuntu? Well this is the same call. Let's get them when they are pissed. They got evident skills.

Why would it not be? For that matter, why would it not be okay to post a single, polite message along the lines of "Hey, we're doing great things over here and have openings if anyone's interested" even if the deal hadn't been made?

Spamming the list with repeated messages would be wrong, as would making threats, lying, etc. I don't see how a single, polite invitation to switch groups would be wrong at almost any time, though.

There's more at stake with the Patent Agreement than just some money changing hands. From what I understand, under the MS/Novell agreement, there would be a potential opportunity for maliciously inserting copyrighted material into the codebase of whatever OSS projects Novell is working on. The codebase could find it's way into other projects too, creating an unintentional derived work off proprietary code. This is why everyone is getting so pissy about the whole thing. There's an Open Letter to Novell on Bruce Peren's website filled with a bunch of sigs of people telling Novell they want nothing to do with them because of this. I posted this link in another comment yesterday. I'm not affiliated, I just think it's worth knowing about, and signing if it suits you. http://techp.org/petition/show/1 [techp.org]